High Court tax case judge invested in avoidance scheme herself

A HIGH COURT judge who ruled on tax cases has invested in a tax avoidance scheme alongside two of her colleagues, according to reports.

Dame Joanna Smith invested in a tax scheme that was challenged by HM Revenue & Customs before she was appointed to the High Court. An investigation by the Financial Times also found that judges Sir Simon Bryan and Sir Martin Griffiths invested in a tax avoidance scheme after they began their judicial careers.

The newspaper said two other judges, Sir Julian Goose and Sir Nicholas Mostyn, invested in tax schemes that had since closed, one of which was described by a government minister as “highly abusive” and “completely contrived”. According to documents lodged with Companies House, Dame Joanna, Sir Simon and Sir Martin have retained their interests in the schemes.

There are no rules requiring judges to make public or private disclosures about their finances. However, judges are required to make disclosures to parties in some cases if they believe there could be a conflict of interest or an appearance of one. Tax avoidance can be pursued by the authorities but is not illegal. The investments were made by the judges between 2003 and 2012.

Dame Joanna invested in two property tax schemes involving tax credits for renovating unused business premises in 2012, nine years before she became a High Court judge. One of the schemes was Curo Charlotte House LLP which was based around a hotel in Glasgow and received payment demands from HMRC in 2014 after it said it was taking action.

Sir Simon, appointed to the High Court in 2017, and Sir Martin, who was appointed in 2019, invested in the Cobalt Data Centre 2 LLP scheme in 2011. The scheme involved enterprise zone tax credits but HMRC successfully challenged this at the Court of Appeal.

HMRC took the case to the Court of Appeal after a lower court found that the scheme had sought to obtain legitimate tax incentives.

The Judicial Office, which supports the judiciary in England and Wales, said the judges did not want to comment.